HTTP://SC.JUDICIARY.GOV.

PH/JURISPRUDE
NCE/2006/JULY2006/G.R.%20NO.
%20125296.HTM
PETITIONERS, AS THEN OFFICERS OF
PAL, WERE NOT PUBLIC OFFICERS

Neither the 1987 Constitution nor RA 6670 (The Ombudsman Act of

1989) defines who public officers are. Instead, its varied definitions
and concepts are found in different statutes [13] and jurisprudence.
[14]

Usually quoted in our decisions is Mechem, a recognized

authority on the subject. In the 2002 case of Laurel v. Desierto,

[15]

the Court extensively quoted his exposition on the term public

officers:
A public office is the right, authority and duty, created and conferred
by law, by which, for a given period, either fixed by law or enduring at the
pleasure of the creating power, an individual is invested with some portion
of the sovereign functions of the government, to be exercised by him for
the benefit of the public. The individual so invested is a public officer.
The characteristics of a public office, according to Mechem, include
the delegation of sovereign functions, its creation by law and not by
contract, an oath, salary, continuance of the position, scope of duties, and
the designation of the position as an office.
xxx xxx xxx
Mechem describes the delegation to the individual of the sovereign
functions of government as [t]he most important characteristic in
determining whether a position is a public office or not.
The most important characteristic which distinguishes an office
from an employment or contract is that the creation and conferring of an
office involves a delegation to the individual of some of the sovereign
functions of government to be exercised by him for the benefit of the
public; that some portion of the sovereignty of the country, either
legislative, executive, or judicial, attaches, for the time being, to be

exercised for the public benefit. Unless the powers conferred are of this
nature, the individual is not a public officer.[16] (italics supplied)

From the foregoing, it can be reasonably inferred that public

officers are those endowed with the exercise of sovereign executive,
legislative or judicial functions.[17] The explication of the term is also
consistent with the Courts pronouncement in Quimpo that, in the
case of officers/employees in GOCCs, they are deemed public
officers if their corporations are tasked to carry out governmental
functions.
In any event, PAL has since reverted to private ownership and
we find it pointless to scrutinize the implications of a legal issue
that technically no longer exists.